banner2e top

Airline Pilots May Get Better Security Than President Obama by Hazel Trice Edney

Dec. 30, 2013

Airline Pilots May Get Better Security Than President Obama
 By Hazel Trice Edney

SPECIAL INVESTIGATION

letteropener photo
Three-inch tip of letter opener inside gift box given to thousands at high security CBCF dinner. TSA refused to allow it on an airplane.

letter opener photo
Letter opener and pen set given at high-security CBCF dinner.

(TriceEdneyWire.com) – He described it as a “dagger”. That was the word used by a Transportation Security Administration (TSA) supervisor at Reagan National Airport Dec. 6 to describe a six-inch metal letter opener with a razor sharp tip at the end of a three-inch blade.

“This could be used as a dagger,” Supervisor Joshua Hunt told this reporter after he was summoned by TSA Officer Venus Washington. Washington had discovered the knife-like instrument inside a large leather purse as it moved through the x-ray machine at the U. S. Airways terminal.

The agents were doing their jobs to protect airline pilots, other employees and passengers. They gave this reporter a choice to either trash it, check it, or FedEx it to herself. She chose the latter.

The TSA officers were unaware that the U. S. Secret Service had apparently given the same letter opener the green light to be distributed by the thousands in a ballroom where President Barack Obama alongside First Lady Michele Obama shook hundreds of hands, separated from the crowd only by a rope.

That night was Sept. 21 at the 43rd Annual Congressional Black Caucus Foundation’s Annual Phoenix Awards Dinner, where the President was keynote speaker. The letter openers, which were incased in black cardboard boxes alongside matching ink pens and placed in each chair, were gifts to the more than 3,000 dinner guests.

The security was so tight for people going into the gala that the Secret Service even confiscated umbrellas. Yet, as the President and First Lady strode from the stage to the floor and worked the rope line after the speech, hundreds of people leaving the event with the ‘dagger’-like instruments in their possession pressed to shake their hands and take photos. The couple interacted with individuals in the crowd for at least six minutes.

President Obama has spoken at nearly every CBCF Phoenix Awards Dinner since he was elected. The friendly, non-threatening audience receives him warmly at the event which showcases the 43-member Congressional Black Caucus and its honorees.

But, hate experts and those familiar with assassination plots indicate no event should be taken for granted. That’s because ambush - a common strategy for deadly attacks on elected officials – remains a constant threat.

When asked for comment, Mark Potok, a spokesman for the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), among the nation’s leading trackers of hate crimes, simply pointed to all the failed plans to assassinate Obama. They included an Oct. 2008 plot foiled by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which arrested two racist skinheads in Tennessee, who had taken several steps toward a plotted killing spree of 88 African-Americans, culminating with Obama, who was then only the Democratic nominee for president.

SPLC reports the number of hate groups leaped to an all-time high of 1,007 in 2012, coinciding with the presence of a Black President in the White House. That - in part - is why President Obama has been protected by a larger Secret Service security force than any other President. The force has done its job successfully, which is why the loose letter openers seemed rather odd.

Secret Service spokesman Edwin M. Donovan said risks can only be minimized, not totally omitted.

“We’re unable to remove all risks when our protectees go somewhere - any of our protectees - the President, the Vice President or anybody else we protect,” Donovan explained in an interview with the Trice Edney News Wire, Sept. 23, the Monday following the dinner.

Donovan, who was not at the dinner that night but said he has worked presidential security in the past, sought to detail why the letter openers were allowed to be so close to the President and Mrs. Obama.

“I would say presumably these were purchased well in advance of the dinner. So, when our advance agents get there setting up security, they have to make a decision based on what the committee tells us. The host committee would say, ‘Hey we’re giving these out as gifts.’ So, you look and you say ‘Oh my goodness, you’re going to give these out to everybody that’s attending?’” he said. “The decision had to be made, ‘Are we going to ask them not to give them out until after the President leaves or are we going to ask them to give them out as people depart? Or are we going to just let them give them out the way they want to?’ So the decision was made to give it out the way you want to.”

CBCF spokeswoman Shrita D. Sterlin-Hernandez declined comment on the CBCF’s interactions with the Secret Service on the matter of the letter openers. She wrote in an email, “I am not comfortable making comments on behalf of the Secret Service's security protocols. Please direct all of your questions about the security of the President to the Secret Service.”

Donovan said as long as the President and First Lady were accompanied by attentive Secret Service agents as they shook hands with the crowd, any danger was minimized.

“That’s their job to look for anything unusual; to look for anybody that’s acting in a way that’s not appropriate or certainly if someone has taken this out of the box and is brandishing it,” he said.

He compared the letter opener to dinner ware.

“They go into a room to visit people, we don’t remove the furniture although someone could pick up a chair presumably and try to strike them,” he said.  “At that table there were knives and forks on the table, there were glasses on the table. Someone could certainly break a glass and cause a problem for us as well.”

The presence of the razor tipped letter opener so close to the President was initially brought to this reporter’s attention by a photographer who observed what appeared to be extremely high security surrounding the event except when it came to the letter openers. The photographer asked to remain anonymous. But that observation gave rise to this Trice Edney News Wire investigation into how many high security areas that letter opener could enter undetected.

Incased in the same black gift box inside a purse, the letter opener was not flagged as it went through the x-ray machine and bag search at the Secret Service headquarters where the interview with Agent Donovan took place Sept. 23.

On Nov. 6, it went undetected through an x-ray machine and bag search at the U. S. Capitol. Yet, afterwards, when asked whether a letter opener would be allowed inside the Capitol building, U. S. Capitol Police spokesman Shennell Antrobus responded in a Nov. 7 e-mail, “Visitors are strictly prohibited from carrying any pointed object, such as letter openers, knitting needles, etc., into the Capitol and Capitol Visitor Center, at all times.”

Then, on Nov. 20, the letter opener was not flagged as it went through a Secret Service x-ray machine and bag search at the White House. That day, it was taken into an East Room ceremony where President Obama bestowed 16 Presidential Medals of Freedom.

It was finally flagged Dec. 6 at the airport security gate, where Officer Washington took no chances. “I saw something in here that looked like a letter opener, but it looked rather sharp,” she said, removing the purse from the x-ray belt and beginning to search.

Despite the sharpness of the letter opener, it apparently did not violate airport security. The list of “Prohibited Items” on TSA.gov doesn’t even mention letter openers. Washington gave a one-sentence explanation as to why it was not allowed on the plane. “It’s to our discretion, Ma’am,” she said.

As the Secret Service successfully handles hundreds of events a year during which the President and/or First Lady conduct rope line greetings, the loose letter openers indicate all loopholes are not closed.

"A lot of what happens in many instances is determined by what the President wants to do," said U. S. Rep. Bennie Thompson, ranking Democrat and former chair of the Homeland Security Committee. For example, he noted that President Clinton would unexpectedly go to a McDonald's  or greet  people who have gone through no security.  "So, I think those are some of the risks associated with it," Thompson said.

Stressing how Secret Service agents "put their lives on the line every day" to protect the president, Thompson concluded, "I'm confident that the Secret Service does a good job. I know that when I chaired the Committee, the President had more threats on his life than any other President before him. So we were able to, even before he became President, we got him a security detail there early; and obviously they've done a good job. But, even with that, there are still potential vulnerabilites that a president or any other person with a detail just has to face."

Study: Black Women Must Work Harder than Whites to Lose Weight by Zenitha Prince

Dec. 29, 2013

Study: Black Women Must Work Harder than Whites to Lose Weight
By Zenitha Prince

womensilhouette

Special to the Trice Edney News Wire from the Afro American Newspaper

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - African-Americans are at a disadvantage in many areas along the socioeconomic spectrum, and according to a new study, weight loss is among them.

Black women need to work harder to lose weight compared to their White counterparts, researchers at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine said in a study published this month in the International Journal of Obesity. To attain a level of weight loss comparable to their Caucasian peers, African-American women need to eat fewer calories and exercise more, the study concluded.

The discrepancy in the responses of Caucasian and African-American women to the same behavioral interventions of calorie restriction or increased physical activity has been suggested in several studies over the years, said James P. DeLany, the study’s lead investigator and an associate professor with the School of Medicine’s Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism.

“At first, it was thought that perhaps the African-American women didn’t adhere as closely to their calorie prescriptions or that the interventions were not culturally sensitive,” he said in a statement. “But even in research projects that were designed to address those possibilities, the difference in weight loss remained.”

DeLany and his team tested the hypothesis that metabolic factors were contributing to the disparity by examining body weight changes, energy expenditure, physical activity and energy intake among 39 severely obese African-American and 66 Caucasian women who were participating in a six-month weight loss program of calorie restriction and increased physical activity. Physical activity levels were measured using multisensor activity monitors.

Despite starting at comparable body mass index measures and adhering as closely to the calorie restriction and activity prescriptions, Black women lost about seven fewer pounds than the White women, the tests revealed.

One possible reason was that the African-American women had lower resting metabolic rates and expended less energy daily than the other group, the study found. That finding could change the recommendations made during weight loss interventions.

“We prescribe how many calories are allowed and how much activity is needed during weight loss interventions based on the premise that people of the same weight have similar metabolic rates,” DeLany explained. “But to account for their lower metabolic rate, African-American women must further reduce the number of calories they eat or use up more of them with exercise in order to lose the same number of pounds in the same time span as a Caucasian woman of the same weight.”

Why Americans Have Grown to Hate Congress by William Spriggs

Dec. 29, 2013
Why Americans Have Grown to Hate Congress

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - Congress has itself to blame for its low ratings among the American people. Policymaking is all about choices. It is the calculus of weighing costs and benefits and the distribution of those costs and benefits. In theory, there are lots of policies that can make everyone better off, but they can only be accomplished by redistributing the gains of the policy.

 

Congress recently passed a budget deal that ended extended unemployment benefits for those unemployed for more than six months. Congress could choose to increase government expenditures-rather than their current stance of decreasing them-as was done in all other economic recoveries.

 

Republican members of Congress think America's working families have forgotten that Republicans expanded real government expenditures (adjusting for inflation) in the 1980s under President Ronald Reagan and 2001 under President George W. Bush by about 16 percent at this point in the business cycle.

 

The stalemate caused by Republican refusal to increase government expenditures has resulted directly in lower public sector employment-the loss of hundreds of thousands of public school teachers across the country; and more broadly in a tepid recovery.

 

The argument against restoring government is that it will increase the federal deficit, leaving unpaid bills for our children to pay and put pressure on interest rates that will hurt investment and homeownership by the middle class and tie the hands of future budgets with large interest costs. Well, of course, the failure to back President Barack Obama's America's Job Act back in 2011 has meant fewer teachers for our children today, rising class sizes and closed schools in many of America's cities, meaning our children will pay with higher dropout rates, lower achievement and lower future earnings. So, that is a trade-off most people think is not sensible.

 

Currently the Federal Reserve, understanding the dire situation of the economy, has been aggressively pursuing a policy to keep long-term interest rates down.  Its efforts has moderated the loss of wealth in housing that most people experienced when the housing price collapse took away the savings America's workers stored in their homes as equity.
The Fed policy also has meant a tremendous growth in the Fed's holding of U.S. Treasury notes. The odd thing about that is that the Federal Reserve's profits from receiving interest payments from holding those bonds go back to the U.S. Treasury. So, currently the structure of U.S. debt is at long-term low rates, and the net interest payments are lower because the Fed pays the interest back to the Treasury. This makes the arguments about interest rates silly.

Ultimately federal debt does have to be paid. Since 2009 and the current recovery, 95 percent of income gains have gone to the top 1 percent of American incomes. In the fairness category, most people would agree that if the net result of policies has benefited the top 1 percent only, then they should be the ones paying taxes. It follows directly from a belief that everyone can be made better off, but only if the people benefiting from the economic policy share the gains with others.

 

But, Republicans have fought hard to protect the 1% from paying their share of policy gains with others. One example is of corporate CEOs who have boosted their salaries by shipping U.S. jobs overseas because of "trade" agreements favoring corporations over human, worker and environmental rights. Through the 1970s, CEOs made 20 times their typical worker; today they take home more than 230 times the pay of their typical worker. And, while the federal government isn't taking advantage of low interest rates, CEOs are by using corporate borrowing to buy back the company stock and boost stock prices and CEO wealth and pay.

 

So, if the point of all this fiscal austerity is to protect us from federal debt in a time of low interest rates, we see who is benefiting. If we favor austerity over creating jobs, then we should at least compensate the people we are asking to suffer-those who are unemployed.

 

Oddly, the research on the effect of extending unemployment benefits has pointed to this anomaly-people getting the benefit are more likely to keep looking for jobs longer rather than give up and drop out of the labor force (disappearing from the statistics). By ignoring them, Congress wishes they would go away. By ignoring the imbalances in their choices, the American people are wishing Congress would go away.

 

Follow Spriggs on Twitter: @WSpriggs. Contact: Amaya Smith-Tune Acting Director, Media Outreach AFL-CIO 202-637-5142

Royal Family Opposes Eviction of Mandela's Third Wife

Dec. 28, 2013

 

Royal Family Opposes Eviction of Mandela's Third Wife

graca-with-madiba 1

Graca and Madiba


 

Special to the Trice Edney News Wire from Global Information Network

 

 

(TriceEdneyWire.com) – Graca Machel, third wife of the late Nelson Mandela, will handle her husband's affairs, said a spokesman for the AbaThembu royal family, putting to rest for the moment various claims on the Mandela estate by other family members.

 

"The passing of Mandela does not terminate his commitment to Machel," said family spokesman Chief Daludumo Mtirara.

.

No member of the Mandela family may intimidate former president Nelson Mandela's widow Graca Machel, the royal family warned, adding that she should not face abusive language or threats to leave the Mandela homes in Houghton or Qunu.

 

Reports that Mandela’s children were moving to evict Machel from the house she and her husband shared were picked up widely by local media.

 

The spokesman for the royals said emphatically: "Nkosikazi Nosizwe Graca Machel remains under the umbrella of the Mandela family and members of the family who do not respect her must refrain from that trend because it is a disgrace that undermines our custom."

 

Shortly after Mandela's death, ex-wife Winnie Madikizela-Mandela called reports of a renewed family feud as "mischievous innuendos" and "apartheid-style" tactics. But she also issued a statement last week declaring Makaziwe Mandela as the head of the family, seconded by Madiba’s daughters, Zindziswa Mandela and Zenani Dlamini Mandela.

 

Makaziwe, the eldest daughter, reportedly ordered that locks be changed at the family homestead in Qunu, in the Eastern Cape, and that his eldest grandson Mandla Mandela be locked out.

 

The Mozambican-born Machel has not announced her future plans as she is still mourning.

 

At the Mandela memorial on Dec. 15, the two wives, Graca and Winnie, were praised in a speech by Malawi President Joyce Banda.

.

“As an African woman and leader,” said Banda, “I wish to acknowledge Mama Winnie Madikizela Mandela for her efforts and steadfastness for standing with Tata Mandela before and during Tata’s imprisonment and for being in the forefront of ANC’s struggle for liberation. And to you, Mama Graca Machel, I wish to thank you for your visible love and care especially during Tata’s last days...To both of you, the love and tolerance you have demonstrated before the whole world during the funeral has shown us that you are prepared to continue with Tata’s ideals."

Reflections: A Season for Caring and Humility by Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, Sr.

Dec. 29, 2013

Reflections: A Season for Caring and Humility
By Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, Sr.

Jesse3

(TriceEdneyWire.com) – Remnants of the holidays remain etched in our memories. The streets and stores were gaily decorated with music in the air. There was the usual scurry for cards and presents; and expectation of families gathering.

Politically – as usual – it was an idle time, a silly season. Every year recently, there are fulminations about someone trying to “steal Christmas,” as if someone could. This year, Fox News was pumping an argument over whether Santa is Black or White, and what color Jesus was. All of this violates the spirit of the holiday.

This is Christmas — a mass celebrating the birth of Christ. What matters is not the color of Jesus or Santa, but their character. Jesus represents promise, hope and redemption. Santa is a commercial icon, representing buying and selling, credit and debt.

Each year at this time, I urge that we remember the real story of Christmas. It’s not about a holiday; it is about a holy day. Jesus was born under occupation to a couple ordered to go far from home.

The innkeeper told his parents that there was no room at the inn. He was born in a manger, an “at-risk baby.”

He came at a time of great expectation among the poor and the oppressed. Prophets had predicted that a mighty Messiah would be born — a king of kings — to defeat the occupiers and free the people. Jesus was that liberator, but he was the Prince of Peace, not a man of war. He gathered disciples, not armies. He converted, rather than conquered, the occupier.

He accumulated no worldly wealth. He threw the money lenders from the temple. He taught us about love, hope, charity and faith. We will be judged, he told us, by how we treat “the least of these.”

We will be graded on how we treat the stranger on the Jericho Road. You don’t need to be a Christian to understand the relevance of his teachings today. We live in one of the richest nations in the world. Our princes of commerce live lavish lives that exceed the grandest excesses of barons and kings of old.

Yet, as a recent report by the United Nations Children’s Fund shows, the U.S. ranks next to last, 34th of 35 developed countries, in the number of children raised in poverty. Over 20 million people are in need of full-time work. Over 4 million are long-term unemployed.

While corporate profits are hitting records, workers’ wages are at new lows as a percentage of GDP. Most Americans are struggling simply to stay afloat. Household incomes continue to decline, as the top 1 percent pockets a staggering 95 percent of the rewards of growth over the last three years.

Christmas is a time of giving. Neighbors contribute to their churches and schools; the buckets of the Salvation Army are filled. The wealthy complete their contributions for the year. Gifts are exchanged with families and friends. But this year, Congress chose to cut food stamps by 7 percent, literally taking food from the mouths of 48 million of our most vulnerable citizens. Congress chose not to extend emergency jobless benefits; in January, 1.3 million Americans desperate to find work will find themselves out in the cold.

This is a rich nation; we can afford to do better. Congress chose not to. As we reflect on this Christmas past, let us each take a moment to remember the real story. Too many get caught up in Santa’s holiday, oppressed by the need for money to buy gifts. But the real celebration is free and liberating. Let us take stock not of the presents we give or receive, but of how we treat the young in the dawn of life, the poor in the pit of life, the elderly in the dusk of life, the stranger on a dark road.

Let’s pledge to lift the vulnerable children born in life’s manger out of poverty. Let’s commit to bring peace to Bethlehem. Remember the Wise Men brought gifts to the child and his parents, not to one another. And their offerings were not the real gift. The true blessing was the child himself, wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.

The Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr. is president/CEO of the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition

X